Re: Portable Makefile ideas

[David Young <dyoung%pobox.com@localhost>]

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 10:14:50PM -0700, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> At Sun, 10 Feb 2019 19:47:02 +0100, Benny Siegert <bsiegert%gmail.com@localhost> wrote:
> Subject: Re: Portable Makefile ideas
> >
> > Perhaps take a look at CMake. I found it to be easier than expected,
> > and it is common enough that package systems like pkgsrc support it
> > directly.
> 
> I see I'm late to the game here, but I'd like to try to dissuade anyone
> who'll hear me out to avoid CMake in any way, shape, form, or use.
> 
> It is a massive, ugly, inconsistent, and incomplete mess of C++
> spaghetti, and it does not do what you think it does, no matter what you
> think it does, nor how well you think you know it.

I've spent a bit of time with CMake simply because it seems to be the
native configuration/build tool for LLVM.  From the surface on down it
seems totally retrograde---I mean, what is that, m4 syntax?

I agree that mk-configure is delightful.  Highly recommended.

Dave

-- 
David Young
dyoung%pobox.com@localhost    Urbana, IL    (217) 721-9981